Say Anything Blog

Gahh…  No…  Are you serious?  WMD in Iraq?  But… But…

Might we revisit this?

or this and this and this and this and…

It’s always good to reiterate the truth, Rob.

A nonstory.  Colin Powell’s dog and pony show was a farce and he regrets it.  WMD…loose term, like ‘insurgents’ and ‘terrorists’.

Some old junk degraded and still there.  Iraq was years away from being a threat to their neighbors let alone the United States.

But if it makes you feel better about killing innocent Iraqis, by all means, play this to the hilt.

A non-story only to the non-thinking polemnicists.

Yet another prop has been kicked from under the Democrat position.

Out Here
Rodney Graves
(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Yeah, right.

Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson, former Chief of Staff to Colin Powell:

  And so we got into Iraq, and so George Packer quotes Richard Haas in his book as saying, “To this day I still don’t know why we went to war in Iraq.” I can go through all the things we listed, from WMD to human rights to - I can go through it - terrorism, but I really can’t sit here and tell you, George, why we went to war in Iraq.

...The then director of the CIA, George Tenent, Vice President Cheney’s deputy Libby, told you that the intelligence that was the basis of going to war was rock solid. Given what you now know, how does that make you feel?

I participated in a hoax on the American people, the international community and the United Nations Security Council. How do you think that makes me feel? Thirty-one years in the United States Army and I more or less end my career with that kind of a blot on my record? That’s not a very comforting thing.

And the hoax continues and the BushFanatics keep playing along.

Yeah, this is bad for the Democrats, who keep telling us that there are none, and never were any WMDs in Iraq.

All this stuff about how Saddam destroyed all of his WMD stockpiles is complete crap, obviously.

A hoax? That’s quite a word.

LAWRENCE WILKERSON: Well, let’s face it, it was…We threw many things out. We threw the script that Scooter Libby had given the—Secretary of State. Forty-eight page script on WMD….And we turned to the National Intelligence estimate as part of the recommendation of George Tenent and my agreement with. But even that turned out to be, in its substantive parts—that is stockpiles of chemicals, biologicals and production capability that was hot and so forth, and an active nuclear program. The three most essential parts of that presentation turned out to be absolutely false.

http://www.pbs.org/now/politics/wilkerson.html

Yeah, this is bad for the Democrats, who keep telling us that there are none, and never were any WMDs in Iraq

Quotes in my posts were by Col. Lawrence Wilkerson:

Lawrence B. Wilkerson
Chief of Staff,
Term of Appointment: 08/01/2002 to 01/26/2005

Colonel, U.S. Army (Retired) Larry Wilkerson joined General Colin L. Powell in March 1989 at the U.S. Army’s Forces Command in Atlanta, Georgia as his Deputy Executive Officer. He followed the General to his next position as Chairman of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff, serving as his special assistant. Upon Powell’s retirement from active service in 1993, Colonel Wilkerson served as the Deputy Director and Director of the U.S. Marine Corps War College at Quantico, Virginia. Upon Wilkerson’s retirement from active service in 1997, he began working for General Powell in a private capacity as a consultant and advisor.

In December 2000, Secretary of State-designate Powell asked Wilkerson to join him in the Transition Office at the U.S. State Department and, later, upon his confirmation as Secretary of State, Secretary Powell moved Wilkerson to his Policy Planning Staff with responsibilities for East Asia and the Pacific, and legislative and political-military affairs. In June of 2002, the Director for Policy Planning, Ambassador Richard Haass, made Wilkerson the associate director. In August of 2002, Secretary Powell moved Wilkerson to the position of Chief of Staff of the Department.

Wilkerson is a veteran of the Vietnam war as well as a U.S. Army “Pacific hand,” having served in Korea, Japan, and Hawaii and participated in military exercises throughout the Pacific. Moreover, Wilkerson was Executive Assistant to US Navy Admiral Stewart A. Ring, Director for Strategy and Policy (J5) USCINCPAC, from 1984-87. Wilkerson also served on the faculty of the U.S. Naval War College at Newport, RI and holds two advanced degrees, one in International Relations and the other in National Security Studies. He has written extensively on military and national security affairs–especially for college-level curricula—and been published in a number of professional journals, including the Naval Institute’s Proceedings, The Naval War College Review, Military Review, and Joint Force Quarterly (JFQ).

Hardly a Democratic leftie commie pinko Bush-hater.

No, just wrong.

Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson or Robert108.  Who might have the best information?  Who might be the best informed?  A guy on a message board or someone who had access to the Secretary of State on a daily basis?

Go to bed, Robert.  You’re in every thread.

The information is correct.  Anyone who tries to deny it is wrong.  Get it?  It’s your credibility that is at stake here.  You backed the wrong horse.

You’re getting sleep….very sleepy….your eyelids are becoming heavy, heavy…..

The bottom line here is this is not what the Bush Administration led the world to believe. Remember the Uranium that never happened, the nuculer program, the mobile labs.

Personally I always knew that that we would find something, shit our own government misplaces stuff all of the time, why would anybody else be different.

The bottom line Saddam did not have the capabilities that led us to war this is just a simple fact.

And I know why do I hate America, Why don’t I support the troops, blah blah blah.

‘Hardly a Democratic leftie commie pinko Bush-hater.’

hmmm. So, ok diane. I submit that you found a retired disgruntled Lt. Col who had many things to say about how the war was handled.

Too bad the guy retired in 2005, because, had he stuck around, we could have watched him eat his words live on CNN.

that aside, let me address your last line about his political affiliation. In all that background, can you find me one thing that points to him being conservative?

(hint: the fact that Colin Powell asked him to be his advisor based on his military experience and knowledge of warfare and national security is not one)

.......Ok. My turn. Lets see, can we all agree that anyone who refers to the VP and Sec of state’s information sharing as a “cabal” can be considered a little left of center?

Yes?

Good.

because good ‘ol mr. Wilkerson, on down in the story, did exactly that. (Pay special attention to the reporter repeating the statment, as if to make sure he wanted to be stuck with that statment)

DAVID BRANCACCIO: You’ve said that Vice President Cheney and Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld managed to hijack the intelligence process. You’ve called it a cabal.

LAWRENCE WILKERSON: Decision—

DAVID BRANCACCIO: And—

LAWRENCE WILKERSON:—making process.

DAVID BRANCACCIO: The decision making process.

LAWRENCE WILKERSON: Right.

DAVID BRANCACCIO: Well, let me get it right. You’ve said that Vice President Dick Cheney and Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld somehow managed to hijack the intelligence decision making process. You called it a cabal.

And said that it was done in a way that makes you think it was more akin to something you’d see in a dictatorship rather than a democracy. Now those are strong words. Why a cabal?

LAWRENCE WILKERSON: Well, the two decisions that I had the most profound insights into and which I have spoken to are the decision to depart from the Geneva Conventions and to depart from international law with regard to treatment of detainees by the Armed Forces in particular. But by the entire US establishment, now including the CIA and contractors in general.

now, since I need to get back to work, I’ll leave you to your rantings. Make sure to mention war for oil, chimpymcbushitler, HALIBURTON! ...

you get the idea.

V

Biy that was a lot of words to say NOTHING.

Yep, all those old warheads,  yep, could just be loaded up and an imminent attack. Could be used to attack us within 45 minutes.  Yeah, this is going to get Santorum reelected.

Puzzle: “Please ignore the man behind the curtain! Nothing to see here!  Move along!”

The purpose of government shouldn’t be to do good, but simply to refrain from doing evil.

I’m a bit behind in my news…are these the pre-1991 warheads that Santorum is talking about?

You’d think an announcement of this import would have come from the Oval Office. Not from a senator down18 points in the poles…Oh, wait, maybe not….

Well, I’m not sure how pre-1991 they are.  What I’ve heard is “circa Gulf War I.”  But yeah, that’s what they are.

Which is why it baffles me why they’re bringing it up now.  We’ve known about weapons like these in Iraq for years now.  They didn’t convince the critics of the war when we discovered them back then and I don’t expect them to convince anyone now.

The purpose of government shouldn’t be to do good, but simply to refrain from doing evil.

They only had 6 months of warning to know we were coming in. 

Besides, going into Iraq was a resumption of hostilities after the cease fire from the first Gulf war.  WMD was not the primary reason, nor was it the only reason.

Again, show the desperation of Santorum to try to use this old stuff to prop up his pathetic poll numbers.

Oh and Rob, if you didn’t want us to comment, why put up the article?

Sarin, Mustard Gas Discovered Separately in Iraq

The round was an old “binary-type” shell in which two chemicals held in separate sections are mixed after firing to produce sarin, Kimmitt said.

If these 500+ shells are binary shells (and they certainly appear to be) the argument the sarin is old and ineffective is destroyed. Binary shells store sarin components separately, they don’t mix until the shell is used, therefore when these components mix the sarin produced is as deadly as it can ever be. I remember reading somewhere we didn’t think Iraq had binary shells and were very surprised to find out these were binary.

For those who think these 500+ sarin shells are insigificant consider this;

a conventional 155-mm shell could hold as much as “two to five” liters of sarin, which is capable of killing thousands of people under the right conditions in highly populated areas.

Do the math on that, 500 X 2-5 L binary sarin components, you are absolutely nuts if you consider this amount of sarin components no big deal.

I do want you to comment, but that doesn’t mean I won’t mock you for your silly positions.

The purpose of government shouldn’t be to do good, but simply to refrain from doing evil.

Could be used to attack us within 45 minutes. Yeah, this is going to get Santorum reelected.

IN the light of the fact these 155mm binary sarin shells were indeed in found in Iraq and very easily could have been fired well within a 45 time frame the above statement is insane, no other word for it except maybe asinine.

Rob!!!

Oh wait, you must be talking to one of the (in)sane people here.

Oh, sorry Jesse.  I was talking to Puzzle feet.

The purpose of government shouldn’t be to do good, but simply to refrain from doing evil.

If it appears that the resident lefties are in a hurry to disparage the discovery of 500 binary Sarin shells… wait til they get wind of the nuclear materials removed from Libya.

Yeah Bat, and why did Libya roll over the day Saddam was found and would have that happened without OIF? Kinda ignored by the barking dogs isn’t it?

Did you ever see this articles?

Iraqi WMD Debate and Intelligence: the Links to Libya

Jesse,

I’ve got Coppley’s article, and the link, in a folder marked “WMD.”  I think I posted the link myself here several months ago.

After digesting this, the next obvious question is where did the yellowcake come from?  My own best guess is that it came from Niger, diverted by the French through Gabon, with the moderately able assistance of a certain former low-level junior ambassador, who later wnet on to purchase a $1.2 million DC home shortly after his “retirement” from the US State Department.  There is no recorded mortgage on the home he shares with his now-celebrated former CIA analyst wife.

After digesting this, the next obvious question is where did the yellowcake come from?

My guess is Pakistan.

Niger, through Wilson and Jefferson, probably.

MikeA,

If you have Ruth’s Chris Steakhouse there where you live, I’d be willing to offer a friendly, open-ended wager about the source of the Libyan yellowcake.  Dinner for two (filet mignon), a suitable bottle of wine, and an after dinner cognac should run about $200.

Of course if you ever get down to the Atlanta area, or I ever make it to the great northern wilds, we could complete the festivities in person.

Deal… or No Deal?

WMD’s In Iraq

What is “In Iraq” and how does a single WMD possess ownership of it?

This is hardly new information concerning shells containing mustard gas, why has it suddenly be brought up now?
http://www.iraqwatch.org/profiles/chemical.html

Iraq initially told UNSCOM that 3,080 tons of mustard gas had been produced, but in 1995 Iraq reduced this amount to 2,850 tons. UNSCOM found Iraq’s mustard gas to be at least 80% pure and determined that it could be stored for long periods of time, both in bulk and in weaponized form. In its distilled form, mustard gas has a long life, and can be stockpiled for decades. It is relatively easy to produce and load into munitions. Iraq admits filling some 550 artillery shells with mustard gas but says it misplaced them shortly after the first Gulf War.

This is from 1999http://www.fas.org/news/un/iraq/s/990125/dis-chem.htm

155-mm artillery shells (mustard) 550 1) No evidence has been found of 550 shells declared by Iraq as having been lost shortly after the Gulf war.

Mustard, Sarin, and Binary Agent Sarin.

Out Here
Rodney Graves
(JavaScript must be enabled to view this email address)

Hate to (not really) disappoint you ‘guys’ but:

Officials: U.S. didn’t find WMDs, despite claims
Comments are response to claims by GOP senators

NBC News and news services
Updated: 6:24 p.m. ET June 22, 2006
WASHINGTON - Senior U.S. intelligence officials said Thursday they have no evidence that Iraq produced chemical weapons after the 1991 Gulf War, despite recent reports from media outlets and Republican lawmakers.

Sen. Rick Santorum of Pennsylvania and Rep. Peter Hoekstra of Michigan on Wednesday pointed to a newly declassified report that says coalition forces have found 500 munitions in Iraq that contained degraded sarin or mustard nerve agents.

They cited the report in an attempt to counter criticism by Democrats who say the decision to go to war was a mistake.
But defense officials said Thursday that the weapons were not considered likely to be dangerous because of their age, which they determined to be pre-1991. Pentagon officials told NBC News that the munitions are the same kind of ordnance the U.S. military has been gathering in Iraq for the past several years, and “not the WMD we were looking for when we went in this time.”

*****************

Ouch.

The lie:  Saddam didn’t have WMD.

The truth: Saddam had WMD.

Robert contradicts Colonel Lawrence Wilkerson and the Pentagon.  Who to believe?

Veritas said:  Too bad the guy retired in 2005, because, had he stuck around, we could have watched him eat his words live on CNN.

We’re ready to watch you eat yours.

That’s a lie.  Saddam had WMD.  We found them.  When they were manufactured is not the issue.  He had them. 

Fact: Mustard gas is just as deadly when it is old; it just requires a different method of dispersal.
Fact: Sarin gas, if the two components are stored separately, is just as usable no matter how old it is.

Saddam had WMD, even if they were “not the ones we were looking for”.  He had WMD.  He had WMD.  You are playing word games, but the truth is, he had WMD.

Robert is saying the Pentagon is wrong, apparently.  They are not my words Robert; all of you were drooling yesterday that this was the find we’d been waiting for and we anti-war types were wrong and this proved it.  If you don’t think so, reread the thread.

I’m being generous here, so why not quit while you’re ahead.

It should surprise no one that the lefties are going into full denial mode on this one.  They have staked everything on the lie that “Saddam had no WMD”, not that he had no new WMD.  Since that has been refuted, they have nothing, and have no choice but to lie and deny, as usual. 
Of course, if they had any integrity, they would admit their mistake, but don’t hold your breath waiting for that to happen.

Robert, you’re beginning to look like an idiot now.

Coming from you, diane, that is a compliment.  I know you meant to be rude and abusive, as usual, but I always consider the source.